300 réponses à ce sujet

[Sidney]

Yrkoon wrote...
I find it stunning that this comment is coming from someone who just finished claiming that he's been an RPG fan since  (insert last century game  here).

RPG fans have been creating whole characters around nothing but their specific weapon choices since...  forever.  Decades before the Drizzt days.

But go ahead.  Tell that  long-time RPG fan that  his Dwarf can't use an axe, he has to use a longsword instead for streamlining purposes.  See where that takes you on the mockery scale..

..and I know from your other statements you are grinder and roll player not role player so this defense doesn't shock me. There's an old bit about describing a character from a book or film and NOT describing what their title/function/job  is and what they look like and if you can't come up with anything else there really isn't a character.  A dwarf with a red beard and axe isn't a character. Nothing about that says anything about character.

The fact that RPG fans are what I said- reactionary - and must see dwavres with axes and elves with bows doesn't serve your case well. It says rather badly the genre needs to be shaken up a lot.

Plus, in the point of this disucssion, your aren't building the NPC's characters. They have their own story so if creating character matters so much then you putting crap on them undermines their story which exists independetly of you.

[Yrkoon]

Sidney wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...
I find it stunning that this comment is coming from someone who just finished claiming that he's been an RPG fan since  (insert last century game  here).

RPG fans have been creating whole characters around nothing but their specific weapon choices since...  forever.  Decades before the Drizzt days.

But go ahead.  Tell that  long-time RPG fan that  his Dwarf can't use an axe, he has to use a longsword instead for streamlining purposes.  See where that takes you on the mockery scale..

..and I know from your other statements you are grinder and roll player not role player so this defense doesn't shock me. There's an old bit about describing a character from a book or film and NOT describing what their title/function/job  is and what they look like and if you can't come up with anything else there really isn't a character.  A dwarf with a red beard and axe isn't a character. Nothing about that says anything about character.

The fact that RPG fans are what I said- reactionary - and must see dwavres with axes and elves with bows doesn't serve your case well. It says rather badly the genre needs to be shaken up a lot.

Plus, in the point of this disucssion, your aren't building the NPC's characters. They have their own story so if creating character matters so much then you putting crap on them undermines their story which exists independetly of you.

Your incoherant gibberish aside,  This is Fantasy Role playing we're discussing here.  Characters are Defined by their weapons.  Thor had his Hammer.  King Arthor had   his Excalibur.  Drizzt had his scimitars.  St. Cuthbert had his Mace.  Your argument is that weapon choices don't matter in a Fantasy Story environment.  Absurd.  Do you know just how many people  LOVED to create protagonists  in BG2 and Neverwinter Nights that emulated Drizzt Do'urden?  Do you remember how many threads the old Bio boards had of people asking "Where can I find a good Hammer?".  "Where can I find the Staff of the Magi?"    "Where is the Holy Avenger"?
 
Do you know how many people Created Characters in BG2  and  built them up over the course of 100+ game hours with the adequate Weapon proficiency points so that they could eventually wield Crom Faeyr?   Or Carsomyr? That's right.  These people  crafted their entire characters around specific weapons they wanted to use.  And you say weapon choices don't matter in an RPG.  LOL    Maybe to you they don't.  You're a fringe minority.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 28 décembre 2011 - 05:48 .

[FirstWarden]

I think the main point that DA3 should have it the ability to explore the world and sidequests after the storyline has ended. I'd like to travel through whole Ferelden and visit the Dalish elves, the dwarves and meet up Arl Eamon again.

[Sidney]

Yrkoon wrote...
Your incoherant gibberish aside,  This is Fantasy Role playing we're discussing here.  Characters are Defined by their weapons.  Thor had his Hammer.  King Arthor had   his Excalibur.  Drizzt had his scimitars.  Your argument is that weapon choices don't matter in a Fantasy Story environment.  Absurd.  Do you know just how many people  LOVED to create protagonists  in BG2 and Neverwinter nights that emulated Drizzt Do'urden?
 
Do you know how many people Created Characters in BG2  and  built them up over the course of 100 game hours with the adequate Weapon proficiency points so that they could eventually wield Crom Faeyr?   Or Carsomyr? That's right.  These people  crafted their entire characters around specific weapons they wanted to use.

And you say weapon choices don't matter in an RPG.  LOL    Maybe to you they don't.

Again, for the hard of hearing, that is a type of gaming but to call it "role playing" seems to miss the concept of a role.
What you are describing is much more akin to good old fashion WoW grinding. You like that, good for you. I can play that game as well- my 47th level mage in Skyrim is grinding away just fine - but I don't want that in all my games. I understand that TES games are about grinding through a really neat world but they aren't about good role playing.

Also, for the hard of hearing, none of your rant has diddly to do with equipping NPC's with stuff.

Modifié par Sidney, 28 décembre 2011 - 05:50 .

[Meris]

FirstWarden wrote...

I think the main point that DA3 should have it the ability to explore the world and sidequests after the storyline has ended. I'd like to travel through whole Ferelden and visit the Dalish elves, the dwarves and meet up Arl Eamon again.

The day BioWare pulls a post-epilogue that you actually see in-game will be orgasmic, but I don't see it happening without generous development time.

[FirstWarden]

Yes, I agree. I rather wait 2,5 yrs for a good game than just 1 yr between every sequel.

[Yrkoon]

Sidney wrote...


Again, for the hard of hearing, that is a type of gaming but to call it "role playing" seems to miss the concept of a role.
What you are describing is much more akin to good old fashion WoW grinding. You like that, good for you. I can play that game as well- my 47th level mage in Skyrim is grinding away just fine - but I don't want that in all my games. I understand that TES games are about grinding through a really neat world but they aren't about good role playing.

What in the world are you talking about?   Role playing  is ABOUT your character.    If I envision a character who's a  master of swords and  has been at one with his Sword since he was 10, but the game I'm playing tells me that I have to wield a mace instead...  That's  a serious lack of choice.  I now have to roleplay a DIFFERENT character with a different background, because my Sword Saint suddenly isn't.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 28 décembre 2011 - 06:00 .

[LinksOcarina]

Role playing is more than just envisioning a master swordsman, it's actually about how he wields the weapon over what type of weapon it is. You can be a saint, or a bastard, but you still wield a weapon around.

I get that people like choice, but the weapons you described serve a dual purpose Yrkoon; they have names to augment the characters that use them. It gives them a bit more character, kind of like how Bianca gave Varric an extra dimension. If your not allowed to throw around a sword or a mace or a staff of what have you, does it really affect you so much since what determines how you use your weapon is your choices via interaction of fellow characters?

Your character that you play can be driven by drama as much as physical items. Complaining about the lack of choice though the weapons or armor is foolhardy, and honestly, shows how superficial you view RPG and myth and fantasy in general.

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 28 décembre 2011 - 06:01 .

[FirstWarden]

I can't believe you can't change armour in DA3.

I read a brilliant comment somewhere in a forum saying:

"We believe that the strong visual identity given to characters by iconic appearances is an important part of their identity," explained Laidlaw.

Yeah, as I played DA:O, making Alistair wear a different suit of armour really made me forget who he was...and how iconic.

Modifié par FirstWarden, 28 décembre 2011 - 06:01 .

[Sidney]

Yrkoon wrote...
What in the world are you talking about?   Role playing  is ABOUT your character.    If I envision a character who's a  master of swords and  has been at one with his Sword since he was 10, but the game I'm playing tells me that I have to wield a mace instead...  That's  a serious lack of choice.  I now have to roleplay a DIFFERENT character with a different background, because my Sword Saint suddenly isn't.

So then BG2 sucked because your cleric couldn't wield a sword? Good to know.

Again, you imagine jobs and functions not a character. That's cool.

Once more how does any of this play into slapping gear on an NPC.

[Meris]

FirstWarden wrote...

I can't believe you can't change armour in DA3.

I read a brilliant comment somewhere in a forum saying:

"We believe that the strong visual identity given to characters by iconic appearances is an important part of their identity," explained Laidlaw.

Yeah, as I played DA:O, making Alistair wear a different suit of armour really made me forget who he was...and how iconic.

I'll tell you what: the people who understand BioWare's attempts at more iconic companions are those who kept Alistair in Templar/Cailan's armor; Morrigan in her robes; Wynne in Senior Enchanter's and so on. Who attempted to equip characters according to some characterization/roleplaying instead of just what's better.

Modifié par Meris, 28 décembre 2011 - 06:03 .

[Yrkoon]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Role playing is more than just envisioning a master swordsman, it's actually about how he wields the weapon over what type of weapon it is. You can be a saint, or a bastard, but you still wield a weapon around.

I get that people like choice, but the weapons you described serve a dual purpose Yrkoon; they have names to augment the characters that use them. It gives them a bit more character, kind of like how Bianca gave Varric an extra dimension. If your not allowed to throw around a sword or a mace or a staff of what have you, does it really affect you so much since what determines how you use your weapon is your choices via interaction of fellow characters?

Your character that you play can be driven by drama as much as physical items. Complaining about the lack of choice though the weapons or armor is foolhardy, and honestly, shows how superficial you view RPG and myth and fantasy in general.

Right.  Weapon choices aren't the only things that matter.  Thanks for pointing that out.  


 

[FirstWarden]

Meris wrote...

FirstWarden wrote...

I can't believe you can't change armour in DA3.

I read a brilliant comment somewhere in a forum saying:

"We believe that the strong visual identity given to characters by iconic appearances is an important part of their identity," explained Laidlaw.

Yeah, as I played DA:O, making Alistair wear a different suit of armour really made me forget who he was...and how iconic.

I'll tell you what: the people who understand BioWare's attempts at more iconic companions are those who kept Alistair in Templar/Cailan's armor; Morrigan in her robes; Wynne in Senior Enchanter's and so on. Who attempted to equip characters according to some characterization/roleplaying instead of just what's better.

I understand your point. I also preferred Alistair in a Templar Armor, but the option to do whatever you want with your companions gives a feeling of comfort. I mean, there were so many cool armours in DAO. You never got bored collecting them all and try them on your companions. Why force a gamer to play a game the way you want while giving everyone the option to pick for themselves is much more fun

[Yrkoon]

Sidney wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...
What in the world are you talking about?   Role playing  is ABOUT your character.    If I envision a character who's a  master of swords and  has been at one with his Sword since he was 10, but the game I'm playing tells me that I have to wield a mace instead...  That's  a serious lack of choice.  I now have to roleplay a DIFFERENT character with a different background, because my Sword Saint suddenly isn't.

So then BG2 sucked because your cleric couldn't wield a sword? Good to know.

Yes?  or at least, it was  one of the game's Rules-based flaws?

...a Flaw that was fixed  in the very next D&D based game that Bioware did, incidently.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 28 décembre 2011 - 06:16 .

[LinksOcarina]

Yrkoon wrote...
Right.  Weapon choices aren't the only things that matter.  Thanks for pointing that out.  

 

Your welcome. Hopefully you will learn from your mistake.

[Meris]

FirstWarden wrote...

Meris wrote...

FirstWarden wrote...

I can't believe you can't change armour in DA3.

I read a brilliant comment somewhere in a forum saying:

"We believe that the strong visual identity given to characters by iconic appearances is an important part of their identity," explained Laidlaw.

Yeah, as I played DA:O, making Alistair wear a different suit of armour really made me forget who he was...and how iconic.

I'll tell you what: the people who understand BioWare's attempts at more iconic companions are those who kept Alistair in Templar/Cailan's armor; Morrigan in her robes; Wynne in Senior Enchanter's and so on. Who attempted to equip characters according to some characterization/roleplaying instead of just what's better.

I understand your point. I also preferred Alistair in a Templar Armor, but the option to do whatever you want with your companions gives a feeling of comfort. I mean, there were so many cool armours in DAO. You never got bored collecting them all and try them on your companions. Why force a gamer to play a game the way you want while giving everyone the option to pick for themselves is much more fun

What we need here is an upgrade of the loot and inventory system. We need a big variety of equipment that you can pick for your Protagonist, not a trove of junk that Hawke would wear if he were a different class.

Big variety (both visual - and in character - and statwise) for you to choose for the companion's wear (not just collect the next set in the row).

[Fast Jimmy]

Meris wrote...

FirstWarden wrote...

I can't believe you can't change armour in DA3.

I read a brilliant comment somewhere in a forum saying:

"We believe that the strong visual identity given to characters by iconic appearances is an important part of their identity," explained Laidlaw.

Yeah, as I played DA:O, making Alistair wear a different suit of armour really made me forget who he was...and how iconic.

I'll tell you what: the people who understand BioWare's attempts at more iconic companions are those who kept Alistair in Templar/Cailan's armor; Morrigan in her robes; Wynne in Senior Enchanter's and so on. Who attempted to equip characters according to some characterization/roleplaying instead of just what's better.

I never once got confused with who was who in DAO, even when they were all layered in different armors. First of all, most cutscenes deactivated the helmet, so you could see who was talking. Second of all, the characters in camp, where the majority of conversations were had, were exactly where they normally were, so no mistake there. In Combat, I rarely had to identify who was who by their apperance, instead I selected their character icon on the screen if I wanted them to perform a task.

So I'm really not seeing where people were honestly confused, even when everyone was wearing Dragon Armor or the Juggernaut set.

[Meris]

If you honestly think the matter here is confusion, you simply didn't understand.

Modifié par Meris, 28 décembre 2011 - 06:17 .

[Yrkoon]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...
Right.  Weapon choices aren't the only things that matter.  Thanks for pointing that out.  

 

Your welcome. Hopefully you will learn from your mistake.

Oh how quaint.  Is this the part of the show were I ask you to show me where I ever argued that weapon choices are the only things that matter in Role playing?

[LinksOcarina]

Gaider did say that they will be doing an approach to appease both camps, customizable armor that is visually different, but fitting with the characters, kind of like the costume changes we see between the romances in-game, or Anders going from white to black for the feathered pauldrons...

That I do like, custom colors and what not sounds fun.

[FirstWarden]

Meris wrote...

FirstWarden wrote...

Meris wrote...

FirstWarden wrote...

I can't believe you can't change armour in DA3.

I read a brilliant comment somewhere in a forum saying:

"We believe that the strong visual identity given to characters by iconic appearances is an important part of their identity," explained Laidlaw.

Yeah, as I played DA:O, making Alistair wear a different suit of armour really made me forget who he was...and how iconic.

I'll tell you what: the people who understand BioWare's attempts at more iconic companions are those who kept Alistair in Templar/Cailan's armor; Morrigan in her robes; Wynne in Senior Enchanter's and so on. Who attempted to equip characters according to some characterization/roleplaying instead of just what's better.

I understand your point. I also preferred Alistair in a Templar Armor, but the option to do whatever you want with your companions gives a feeling of comfort. I mean, there were so many cool armours in DAO. You never got bored collecting them all and try them on your companions. Why force a gamer to play a game the way you want while giving everyone the option to pick for themselves is much more fun

What we need here is an upgrade of the loot and inventory system. We need a big variety of equipment that you can pick for your Protagonist, not a trove of junk that Hawke would wear if he were a different class.

Big variety (both visual - and in character - and statwise) for you to choose for the companion's wear (not just collect the next set in the row).

Yes, I totally agree. We should be head producers for DA3 lol

[Meris]

@LinksOcarina and FirstWarden

And in the end, I suppose the future can be worth waiting for.

[LinksOcarina]

Yrkoon wrote...

Oh how quaint.  Is this the part of the show were I ask you to show me where I ever argued that weapon choices are the only things that matter in Role playing?

Hmm...

Yrkoon wrote...

I find it stunning that this comment is coming from someone who just finished claiming that he's been an RPG fan since  (insert last century game  here).

RPG fans have been creating whole characters around nothing but their specific weapon choices since...  forever.  Decades before the Drizzt days.

But go ahead.  Tell that  long-time RPG fan that  his Dwarf can't use an axe, he has to use a longsword instead for streamlining purposes.  See where that takes you on the mockery scale..

Your incoherant gibberish aside,  This is Fantasy Role playing we're discussing here.  Characters are Defined by their weapons.  Thor had his Hammer.  King Arthor had   his Excalibur.  Drizzt had his scimitars.  St. Cuthbert had his Mace.  Your argument is that weapon choices don't matter in a Fantasy Story environment.  Absurd.  Do you know just how many people  LOVED to create protagonists  in BG2 and Neverwinter Nights that emulated Drizzt Do'urden?  Do you remember how many threads the old Bio boards had of people asking "Where can I find a good Hammer?".  "Where can I find the Staff of the Magi?"    "Where is the Holy Avenger"?
 
Do you know how many people Created Characters in BG2  and  built them up over the course of 100+ game hours with the adequate Weapon proficiency points so that they could eventually wield Crom Faeyr?   Or Carsomyr? That's right.  These people  crafted their entire characters around specific weapons they wanted to use.  And you say weapon choices don't matter in an RPG.  LOL    Maybe to you they don't.  You're a fringe minority.

 

Am I being clear yet? Or are you just contradicting what you said previously to make yourself look like a bigger fool?

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 28 décembre 2011 - 06:26 .

[Yrkoon]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

Oh how quaint.  Is this the part of the show were I ask you to show me where I ever argued that weapon choices are the only things that matter in Role playing?

Hmm...

Yrkoon wrote...

I find it stunning that this comment is coming from someone who just finished claiming that he's been an RPG fan since  (insert last century game  here).

RPG fans have been creating whole characters around nothing but their specific weapon choices since...  forever.  Decades before the Drizzt days.

But go ahead.  Tell that  long-time RPG fan that  his Dwarf can't use an axe, he has to use a longsword instead for streamlining purposes.  See where that takes you on the mockery scale..

Your incoherant gibberish aside,  This is Fantasy Role playing we're discussing here.  Characters are Defined by their weapons.  Thor had his Hammer.  King Arthor had   his Excalibur.  Drizzt had his scimitars.  St. Cuthbert had his Mace.  Your argument is that weapon choices don't matter in a Fantasy Story environment.  Absurd.  Do you know just how many people  LOVED to create protagonists  in BG2 and Neverwinter Nights that emulated Drizzt Do'urden?  Do you remember how many threads the old Bio boards had of people asking "Where can I find a good Hammer?".  "Where can I find the Staff of the Magi?"    "Where is the Holy Avenger"?
 
Do you know how many people Created Characters in BG2  and  built them up over the course of 100+ game hours with the adequate Weapon proficiency points so that they could eventually wield Crom Faeyr?   Or Carsomyr? That's right.  These people  crafted their entire characters around specific weapons they wanted to use.  And you say weapon choices don't matter in an RPG.  LOL    Maybe to you they don't.  You're a fringe minority.

 

Am I being clear yet?

Well, your straw man is.

No where in that quote of mine am I arguing that Weapon choices are the only things that matter.  Just that they Define the character.  Are they the only thing that can ever  define the character?  Nope. And that goes without saying.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 28 décembre 2011 - 06:28 .

[LinksOcarina]

And yet, you argued with someone that having weapon choices is what defines them the most, when in actuality they define them the least.

Hardly a straw man argument on my side, at least.